The effect of adding tobramycin to Simplex P cement on femoral stem micromotion as measured by radiostereometric analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous in vitro research on addition of antibiotics to bone cement has found no statistically significant deterioration in mechanical properties. However, no clinical studies have compared the performance of tobramycin-laden bone cement with that of standard bone cement (Simplex P). PATIENTS AND METHODS: 23 patients (25 hips) were randomized to receive an Exeter (Stryker Orthopaedics) femoral stem cemented with either Simplex P (standard) or Simplex T (tobramycin-laden) cement. There were 2 years of follow-up, with scheduled radiostereometric (RSA) examinations. RESULTS: All stems migrated distally and showed some degree of retroversion. No clinically significant differences in stem subsidence or retroversion were found between the Simplex T and Simplex P cement groups after 2 years. Overall subsidence was less than in previous studies, probably due to a postponed initial post-surgical examination. Rates of subsidence in both cement groups were consistent with those from previous studies of Exeter stems. INTERPRETATION: Subsidence of the femoral stem after 2 years was similar in the Simplex T (tobramycin-laden) and Simplex P (standard) groups.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".